Metropolitan Opera to Broadcast Live Operas to Movie Theatres - Bravo

[Croynan]

The New York Times

September 6, 2006

Met to Broadcast Live Operas Into Movie Theaters

By DANIEL J. WAKIN

Coming soon to your multiplex in the mall: bel canto fireworks and bass-baritone rumbles, love duets and orchestral colors, divas, tenors and trills.

The Metropolitan Opera announced today that it would begin broadcasting live performances into movie theaters across the United States, Canada and Britain, rubbing shoulders with professional wrestling and rock concerts.

The broadcasts are part of a strategy by the Met’s new general manager, Peter Gelb, to widen the house’s appeal by branching out into new media. The house also said today that it was opening up its vast archive of historic radio broadcast performances for streaming and downloading.

“I think what I’m doing is exactly what the Met engaged me to do, which is build bridges to a broader public,” Mr. Gelb said. “The thrust of our plan is to make the Met more available. This is not about dumbing down the Met, it’s just making it accessible.”

The Met was able to move forward with the plan after reaching agreements with its unions over fees. Opera broadcasts have already dwindled because of the high costs to produce them, and provisions do not even exist for digital delivery, like Internet streaming and downloading.

Mr. Gelb said that the unions agreed, essentially, to end the arrangement of receiving high up-front fees and payments for later uses of a broadcast, and instead will permit unlimited exploitation by the Met of broadcasts in exchange for sharing future revenues.

“We are in a position of really controlling our content,” Mr. Gelb said. The next potential steps will be to offer performances on satellite, on-demand cable, DVD and CD. But he added that the potential for these new markets was unclear.

David Lennon, president of Local 802 of the American Federation of Musicians, which represents the Met orchestra, said the arrangement would provide a “significant guarantee of additional revenue” for the players. Other union leaders said the agreements reflected the understanding that increasing audience through technology would make opera healthier.

For now, the Met has arrangements with three companies that provide programming to movie theaters. They will transmit six performances, all on this year’s slate of regular Met Saturday afternoon broadcasts, starting on Dec. 30 with a shortened, translated version of “Die Zauberflote,” directed by Julie Taymor. The other broadcasts will be of “I Puritani,” starring Anna Netrebko; “The First Emperor” by Tan Dun, a new opera; “Yevgeny Onegin” with Renée Fleming and Dmitri Hvorostovsky, conducted by Valery Gergiev; “The Barber of Seville”; and “Il Trittico.” “Barber” and “Trittico” are also new productions.

Mr. Gelb, who first revealed his hope to create such simulcasts in February, said they would be broadcast in high definition with “fantastic surround sound.” They will be shown in 100 to 200 theaters at first, he said, and then 200 to 300, with tickets costing around $18 in the United States. The performances will also be broadcast on PBS, which is the co-producer.

“There’s a great spectator quality to opera that can take advantage of new technology and work on the large screen in movie theaters,” Mr. Gelb said. And the demand for Saturday broadcast opera is well in place around the country after 75 years of Met Opera on the radio.

“We have a built-in audience of loyal radio listeners, whom we expect to embrace this idea,” he said.

Marc A. Scorca, the president of Opera America, a service organization, said he knew of no other regular broadcasts in the United States, although the Royal Opera House at Covent Garden had shown several performances in theaters in France several years ago.

While acknowledging that some purists may frown on the broadcasts, Mr. Scorca dismissed such concerns.

“Opera is always best in opera house in live performance,” he said. “If this is a way to build curiosity, I think that’s great. Even if it gets people to be more excited about opera in any form, that’s good.”

Mr. Gelb was cagey about whether the broadcasts would be a source of income. “The biggest benefit for the Met initially is to actually make all these productions and reach this huge audience,” he said. “We hope to make money from it.” He also said an expanded media presence for performances would make the Met more attractive to stars.

As for the historic recordings, Mr. Gelb said he expected them to be available within the first weeks of the season through the Rhapsody Internet service. The Met is in the middle of restoring its archival broadcasts, having completed more than 400 of about 1,400.

 

[Styrker]

Don't quote me but I think "DEPECHE MODE" is going to open that can of worms first!! Anyone got details???

I LOVE EM!!

 

[SFMusic]

Great news indeed.

 

[slobone]

You read it here first: they're going to lose their shirts on this one. Nobody's going to pay $18 to see what amounts to a TV broadcast of an opera in a movie theater, with subtitles, especially when PBS is going to broadcast the same performance for free. There are already operas on DVD you can watch if you're so inclined, but I doubt that they're big hits on Netflix.

The Met wants to build a younger audience, but they're way behind. They've given next to no premieres of new operas over the last 50 years. They should have been actively developing a repertoire of operas by American composers all along -- then they'd have something to draw on.

Julie Taymor's Magic Flute might do well. But Onegin? Puritani? Dead, dead, dead. Barber could be a hit if they really let their hair down with a hilarious production. Except it would be a one-shot deal, so there's no chance to build word of mouth.

The Ring might work with this audience, if they can get somebody to do it like the Lord of the Rings, not one of those "abstract" productions. And it's got 4 parts, so you have the chance to build the audience a little.

 

[Croynan]

You read it here first: they're going to lose their shirts on this one. Nobody's going to pay $18 to see what amounts to a TV broadcast of an opera in a movie theater, with subtitles, especially when PBS is going to broadcast the same performance for free. There are already operas on DVD you can watch if you're so inclined, but I doubt that they're big hits on Netflix.

The Met wants to build a younger audience, but they're way behind. They've given next to no premieres of new operas over the last 50 years. They should have been actively developing a repertoire of operas by American composers all along -- then they'd have something to draw on.

Julie Taymor's Magic Flute might do well. But Onegin? Puritani? Dead, dead, dead. Barber could be a hit if they really let their hair down with a hilarious production. Except it would be a one-shot deal, so there's no chance to build word of mouth.

The Ring might work with this audience, if they can get somebody to do it like the Lord of the Rings, not one of those "abstract" productions. And it's got 4 parts, so you have the chance to build the audience a little.

The conductor for that production will be Valery Gergiev and I promise you the price of admission will be worth it just to watch and listen to him conduct. He lives among the stars.



eM

 

[Sausy]

There's something to the movie experience that the isolation of television through public broadcasting,cable and DVD cannot capture,the immediacy and grandeur of a full scale production.Maybe the price is a bit high,but hardly exorbitant when broadway can sell tickets for fifty to one hundred dollars for its most in demand productions.It's a noble,great experiment-and a hell of a lot more entertaining and meaningful than 80% of the crap that passes for motion pictures today.Thank you,Metropolitan Opera!

 

[Ddouble]

There's something to the movie experience that the isolation of television through public broadcasting,cable and DVD cannot capture,the immediacy and grandeur of a full scale production.Maybe the price is a bit high,but hardly exorbitant when broadway can sell tickets for fifty to one hundred dollars for its most in demand productions.It's a noble,great experiment-and a hell of a lot more entertaining and meaningful than 80% of the crap that passes for motion pictures today.Thank you,Metropolitan Opera!

I agree... I could totally revitalize the movie-going experience... And why stop with operas... Why couldn't network and cable television do the same thing for special events, such as "final episode" shows, benefit concerts, state funerals, etc...

 

[Yves]

Thanks for the article.

Peter Gelb seems to embrace new technology from digital downloading to TV broadcasts in high definition but the Met is well behind compared to other companies in terms of downloading or access to recent live productions (CDs and DVDs).

....There are already operas on DVD you can watch if you're so inclined, but I doubt that they're big hits on Netflix.

Opera on DVD may not be a huge success on Netflix but it´s doing well in terms of sales (some DVD companies in particular). It´s a growing market (not the same as porn) because of cost (DVDs are cheaper than audio-only studio productions), audio capabilities, extra material and range of titles (from Monteverdi´s L´Orfeo to John Adams´ El Niño).

There is no comparison between the number of recent MET productions available on DVD vs. Salzburg or Glyndebourne to name just a few. A good number of productions from last season at Salzburg or Gyndebourne are now available thanks to exclusive agreements with European audio/video companies. Last year´s La Traviata (DG) with Villazón & Netrebko live at Salzburg has sold more than 300,000 DVD units so far, a significant number for opera. For different reasons the MET has been very slow in terms of adaptation to the digital environment. Peter Gelb in a recent interview recognized the challenges of expanding the market beyond traditional opera lovers (According to Gelb the typical Met attendee is a 62-year-old college graduate earning about $120,000 and not necessarily iPod friendly)

Radio broadcasts are a great and cheap alternative for many of us (most of the recent seasons are available as MP3) but image seems essential in this post MTV age. The movie broadcast seems a creative idea but limited in terms of market (high price and repertory). I agree with slobone, Juliet Taymor´s Magic Flute commercial prospects are good (it was a great commercial success) but it might be harder to sell Eugene Onegin with Valery Gergiev independent of his qualities as musical director or Tan Dun´s The First Emperor (Great to hear a new opera is part of this deal). More information and context has to be provided to the general public in order to increase the visibility and $18 is not the best way to start the promotion.

But my "thing" is not only in the final, perfected performance but in its construction and how this is a audio-visual, theatrical art. I love rehearsals of operas and the behind the scenes. Its utterly fascinating, educational and entertaining to watch a GRAND OPERA being mounted. The things which occur and all the music and the temperments and nuts & bolts which make an opera.

Good idea. The behind the scenes aspect is fascinating and commercially attractive if done well. Some of the most commercially successful opera DVD releases in the last few months have included special documentaries on pre-production/rehearsals from scenography to vocal aspects (Handel´s Giulio Cesare from Glyndebourne or La Traviata from Salzburg).

 

[slobone]

The movie experience makes sense- brings it to Life size stage proportion and all the dolby sound and all that.

One of the great movies is Franco Zeffirelli's version of "La Traviata". Ohmygoodness, I love that "opera" film which is done cinematically rather than broadcast live quality, of course

There's something to the movie experience that the isolation of television through public broadcasting,cable and DVD cannot capture,the immediacy and grandeur of a full scale production.Maybe the price is a bit high,but hardly exorbitant when broadway can sell tickets for fifty to one hundred dollars for its most in demand productions.It's a noble,great experiment-and a hell of a lot more entertaining and meaningful than 80% of the crap that passes for motion pictures today.Thank you,Metropolitan Opera!

Please keep in mind that these presentations will not be movies in the sense of Zeffirelli's Traviata. They will essentially be television broadcasts blown up to the size of a movie screen -- probably a giant movie screen from what they said in the article. No matter how crisp a digital format they use, the visual quality will fall far short of what movie audiences expect from even the most mediocre Hollywood production.

That's because these will be simulcasts of operas also being presented to a live audience at the Met. With the consequent restrictions in terms of lighting, camera placement, and editing, and even makeup, costumes, etc. The two media just have completely different requirements.

However, I think I may have crunched the numbers wrong a little bit. $18 probably won't seem like all that much when movie tickets are often $10 and up. And there may be enough of a pre-existing opera audience in some cities to fill the theater for a one-time only deal. After all, in cities with opera companies, tens or hundreds of thousands of people attend each year. So in New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Houston, LA, Washington, St. Louis, -- Boston, Philadelphia, Dallas, Seattle? -- it could do quite well.

But I still don't think it's going to do much to build up a new audience, which is supposed to be the point.

And I reiterate that American opera companies must promote the development of a repertoire of operas in English. All the great opera composers of the past assumed that the audience would understand what the singers were saying without projected titles. Verdi had his operas translated into French for productions in Paris.

We have a native art form in the US that's very close to opera -- musical theater. Why not build on that as a source for works acceptable to the Met? If they can do Fledermaus, why can't they do Oklahoma? If they can do Carmen (which originally had spoken dialog) why can't they do West Side Story? If they can do Kurt Weill's Mahagonny, why can't they do Sweeney Todd?

Or, as I said, sponsor the creation of new works that would be along the same lines but perhaps more demanding vocally. Other opera companies have done this, taking texts from the theater and movies, for example Streetcar Named Desire and Dead Man Walking. But the Met seems hopelessly stuck in the past, I think because they're financially dependent on rich New Yorkers, the most conservative audience in the country.

 

[Yves]

We have a native art form in the US that's very close to opera -- musical theater. Why not build on that as a source for works acceptable to the Met? If they can do Fledermaus, why can't they do Oklahoma? If they can do Carmen (which originally had spoken dialog) why can't they do West Side Story? If they can do Kurt Weill's Mahagonny, why can't they do Sweeney Todd?

Or, as I said, sponsor the creation of new works that would be along the same lines but perhaps more demanding vocally. Other opera companies have done this, taking texts from the theater and movies, for example Streetcar Named Desire and Dead Man Walking. But the Met seems hopelessly stuck in the past, I think because they're financially dependent on rich New Yorkers, the most conservative audience in the country.

Peter Gelb has stated the need for new works but at the same time has recognized the challenges of working for a very conservative audience. The Met has a limited repertoire in terms of both contemporary and baroque opera. Sweeney Todd or Dead Man Walking are great ideas, but the production of Sweeney Todd at the Met encountered resistance from those who want to make a distinction between opera as a "serious" art form and American musical theater.

The next three seasons have already been mostly planned. It´s too early to notice the impact of the new manager. The first season fully planned by Peter Gelb will be 2009-10 and it´s supposed to include some new works as a result of a new collaboration between the Met and Lincoln Center Theater. The Met and the theater have commissioned works from a range of composers and playwrights, some of them outside the classical tradition. The Met has commissioned works from pop songwriters in the past from Elvis Costello to Carly Simon (Simon´s opus: "Romulus Hunt" was labeled "a family opera" to attract baby boomers and their kids ) but those projects were not very successful. The Met is holding open a spot during the 2011-12 season for the first product of this collaboration. The artists include Tony Kushner, Rufus Wainwright, Scott Wheeler and Michael Torke. It´s seems we´ll have to wait for a new works at the Met. San Francisco and other American companies are doing much better in terms of new productions on more current issues.

 

[buzzj]

The Met At The Multiplex will totally change my Saturday afternoons from December thru April--and probably a lot of other people's Saturday afternoons also.

Isn't that the truth!...and for the better, too! At least in my case...

 

[slobone]

The Met At The Multiplex will totally change my Saturday afternoons from December thru April--and probably a lot of other people's Saturday afternoons also.

Ooh, Haze honey, calm down -- take a deep breath. Think of Elvin in his jockstrap. There -- feel better?

The Saturday radio broadcasts are still on, last I heard. And I don't believe it's been announced that the movies will be shown on Saturdays. Me, I don't think that would be the best choice. And they're only doing six of them the first year.

I'm sure they'll have some special intermission features for the movie audience (after the popcorn-selling trailer, of course). I'm sure they'll include a special audiovisual version of the Opera Quiz. So you'll get to see what Father Owen Lee and Alberta Masiello look like in person. Won't that be fun?

 

[operafan]

They've given next to no premieres of new operas over the last 50 years. They should have been actively developing a repertoire of operas by American composers all along -- then they'd have something to draw on.

Julie Taymor's Magic Flute might do well. But Onegin? Puritani? Dead, dead, dead. Barber could be a hit if they really let their hair down with a hilarious production. Except it would be a one-shot deal, so there's no chance to build word of mouth.

I hope this is a possibility in KC because Puritani is an example of something I'll never see live in KC but would LOVE to see a grand production.

Regarding the fact that the lack of new operas with American composers are part of the problem, I have to disagree. I almost NEVER like an opera the first time I hear or see it. I need to have an opportunity to learn the music first in order to really enjoy it. I have to tell you that when I saw "Ghosts of Versailles" at Chicago that evening was the longest week of my life. Ugh! I'm very hesitant to attend new operas that are live let alone going to the movie house.

I have to tell you that I saw the Taymore "Magic Flute" last year. It was a stunning production. Don't know how it will translate to the screen, however. The Met used it as an opportunity to use less than stellar singers because so many people came to applaud the scenery.

 

[slobone]

I hope this is a possibility in KC because Puritani is an example of something I'll never see live in KC but would LOVE to see a grand production.

Regarding the fact that the lack of new operas with American composers are part of the problem, I have to disagree. I almost NEVER like an opera the first time I hear or see it. I need to have an opportunity to learn the music first in order to really enjoy it. I have to tell you that when I saw "Ghosts of Versailles" at Chicago that evening was the longest week of my life. Ugh! I'm very hesitant to attend new operas that are live let alone going to the movie house.

I have to tell you that I saw the Taymore "Magic Flute" last year. It was a stunning production. Don't know how it will translate to the screen, however. The Met used it as an opportunity to use less than stellar singers because so many people came to applaud the scenery.

I guess my point about new operas was more as part of a long-term strategy. For a one-shot deal like this you're right, they'd probably be a tough sell.

I'd like to see them do a really dazzling production of the Ring. If they marketed it right they could bring all the scifi/fantasy geeks out of the woodwork. How about Tim Burton as director?

 

[SFMusic]

One hundred years ago, George Bernard Shaw advised Perfect Wagnerites attending Ring performances at Covent Garden to close their eyes soon as the curtain went up...

Works for me when listening to the radio broadcasts. But do I really want to see Montserrat Caballe on a wide, wide screen??

Follow George Bernard Shaws advice.